New Thunderbolt Gigabit Ethernet adapter - custom/not TB?

[helveta]

Just a quick followup. When I applied the new update the adapter worked. My only complaint is that no one on Apple phone support seemed to know anything about the issue and said it was a hardware issue.

[KPOM]

Originally Posted by ender21

Apple, meet orange. There's a big difference between having it and not needing it and needing it and not having it. I'd take 20 things on any electronics appliance or car I own and never need them, than the reverse.

The difference is that Apple has made the port available, but they decided not to build it in. Leaving in ports that people might need goes against their design philosophy. Part of the reason the Windows side moves so slowly is that PC OEMs insist upon leaving in old technology. That's why we had bulky Windows notebooks with VGA adapters and before that parallel, serial, and PS/2 keyboard and mouse ports. My work notebook from late 2008 still has a built in modem. It's a bit ridiculous.


Interestingly, Apple did include HDMI in the new Retina MacBook Pro, for the first time ever in a portable Mac. I wonder what the rationale was, considering that they have long sold an mDP to HDMI adapter.

On another note, with Ultrabooks, PC OEMs are starting to adopt some of Apple's design philosophy. The new Vizio Thin+Lights ship with only 2 USB 3.0 ports and HDMI. They don't even sell a USB 3.0 to Ethernet adapter, much less include a built-in port.

[jcpb]

As VGA is still widely used by projectors, I wouldn't write them off laptops just yet.

[Anonymous Freak]

Well, to answer my own original question...

AnandTech, in their review of the Retina MacBook Pro, said that the Ethernet adapter (at least, likely also the FireWire 800 adapter,) use Intel's new (and MUCH cheaper) Thunderbolt chip with no pass-through capability. Since it's just a single-plug 'dongle' style adapter, it only needs the one chip plus the Ethernet chip (which are insanely cheap.) Thus, it *CAN* be cheaper than the older Thunderbolt cable, which uses the higher-end (passthrough, not single-device-only) transceiver chip. Since the Ethernet chip is right there, the adapter doesn't need a transceiver to go long distance, just the Thunderbolt chip and Ethernet chip.

[Hermodorus]

How on earth does one find the MAC address on the new TB to GigE adapter?

I can only find the UID.

Thanks in advance for not telling me that MAC addresses are superfluous in the Nu Apple Order.

[drsox]

Originally Posted by Hermodorus

How on earth does one find the MAC address on the new TB to GigE adapter?

I can only find the UID.

Thanks in advance for not telling me that MAC addresses are superfluous in the Nu Apple Order.

System Preferences>Network>Thunderbolt Ethernet (assume it is plugged in and working)>Advanced>Hardware>MAC address is visible.

[Rizzn]

Originally Posted by KPOM

The difference is that Apple has made the port available, but they decided not to build it in. Leaving in ports that people might need goes against their design philosophy. Part of the reason the Windows side moves so slowly is that PC OEMs insist upon leaving in old technology. That's why we had bulky Windows notebooks with VGA adapters and before that parallel, serial, and PS/2 keyboard and mouse ports. My work notebook from late 2008 still has a built in modem. It's a bit ridiculous.


Interestingly, Apple did include HDMI in the new Retina MacBook Pro, for the first time ever in a portable Mac. I wonder what the rationale was, considering that they have long sold an mDP to HDMI adapter.

On another note, with Ultrabooks, PC OEMs are starting to adopt some of Apple's design philosophy. The new Vizio Thin+Lights ship with only 2 USB 3.0 ports and HDMI. They don't even sell a USB 3.0 to Ethernet adapter, much less include a built-in port.

They're trying to push the production of Thunderbolt peripherals that actually need the extra bandwidth. They're betting that people are going to want to use both of the Thunderbolt ports for more power hungry accessories.

[felixen]

Are there any cheaper ways to connect ethernet to my Macbook Air 2012 than this? I just need it for connecting directly to my Time Capsule so I don't have to connect via wifi. I'm restoring my Air and it takes forever right now, so I wish I could just plug in a cable directly.

[rpg51]

I have a late 2011 MBA with TB. I have a USB/Ethernet Adapter. At work I plug into ethernet in a large government network. If I were to purchase the new TB/Ethernet adapter would I experience a noticeable increase in network speed?

[Anonymous Freak]

Originally Posted by felixen

Are there any cheaper ways to connect ethernet to my Macbook Air 2012 than this? I just need it for connecting directly to my Time Capsule so I don't have to connect via wifi. I'm restoring my Air and it takes forever right now, so I wish I could just plug in a cable directly.

"cheaper"? No. USB Ethernet adapters cost about the same, and top out at 100 Mbit/s. This can do full Gigabit speeds.

Originally Posted by rpg51

I have a late 2011 MBA with TB. I have a USB/Ethernet Adapter. At work I plug into ethernet in a large government network. If I were to purchase the new TB/Ethernet adapter would I experience a noticeable increase in network speed?

That all depends on your environment! If their network infrastructure can handle full gigabit speeds, then you'll see a noticeable improvement when copying files or doing other large transfers. You will not see any increase in speed doing web browsing though.

[Nodrog51]

Originally Posted by KylePowers

The fact is, a lot of people don't use ethernet anymore... just like how a lot of people don't use DVDs, CDs, floppy discs, laser discs, or records. It's a dying standard, despite how prevalent it unfortunately still is (mostly in work places for security purposes, so I've read). It isn't until we as a society shun its use that we'll finally start seeing some real advancement in wireless (which for a lot of people, is perfectly fine right now).

Every now and again someone says something that you just can't ignore. What a complete and utter load of rubbish. Sorry but this is going to help no one apart from the fan boys (what ever they are). You obviously have a computer but know nothing about IT... fair enough, welcome to apple!

Contrary to your alleged fact(?) while CDs and floppy discs, maybe, ethernet is certainly going no where. Compared to ethernet, wifi data throughput is a joke, especially with multiple hosts hitting single APs. ...'security, so you have read' catch up mate, you can hack wifi from outside a building but you have to break in to get into a wired network.

Oh, and by the way, records are making a come back because... well there's a stack of debate on good old google.

[KylePowers]

Originally Posted by Nodrog51

Every now and again someone says something that you just can't ignore. What a complete and utter load of rubbish. Sorry but this is going to help no one apart from the fan boys (what ever they are). You obviously have a computer but know nothing about IT... fair enough, welcome to apple!

Contrary to your alleged fact(?) while CDs and floppy discs, maybe, ethernet is certainly going no where. Compared to ethernet, wifi data throughput is a joke, especially with multiple hosts hitting single APs. ...'security, so you have read' catch up mate, you can hack wifi from outside a building but you have to break in to get into a wired network.

Oh, and by the way, records are making a come back because... well there's a stack of debate on good old google.

Thank you for quoting an 8-month old post. I will gladly debate you, because I am bored.

IT represents a minuscule fraction of consumer laptop purchases, and especially Apple ones. Walk into any collegiate lecture hall, library, or dorm... how many of them are using ethernet? Hint: It's very close to 0. IT is clearly not Apple's target demographic.

My initial statement holds. A lot of people do not use ethernet anymore, especially in the context of this thread in which was referring to Thunderbolt-compatible Apple laptops. It's inconvenient and the advent of wireless, especially dual- (or tri-) antenna routers make it no longer necessary for the majority of computer uses (i.e. web browsing, music/video streaming, etc).

I am assuming you're taking this with so much angst because you are involved with IT in some way. Well, I on the other hand, am an electrical engineer. As an engineer, you must remove yourself from the commonly-held frameworks of society to truly produce innovation. Wireless networking was a true innovation and its adoption is increasing daily. My argument was that those whom grip onto the old (i.e. ethernet) are simply slowing down the advancement of this technology. That's hardly debatable.

But then again, it's like that for any technology or invention. There will always be reasons and people for holding on to the old, and rightly so, it may be entirely necessary. But eventually it will die out, newer technologies will replace it, and then those will someday be the ones holding us back.

Regardless, the Thunderbolt ethernet adapter gladly lets consumers use ethernet if they so choose. So it's a win-win for everyone.

Cheers

[el-John-o]

Originally Posted by radiogoober

It sounds like you just want something to cry about.

1. WiFi. Welcome to 2002.

2. No one is forcing you to buy a computer without a wired ethernet port.

3. $29 is cheap for a Thunderbolt accessory. In fact, it's probably the cheapest Thunderbolt accessory on the market.

Many of us use large arrays of network storage, Wi-Fi just isn't practical. Even with a top-of-the-line Wireless N router, speeds are never anywhere near theoretical, and even if they were, it's less than half the speed of ethernet. With gigabit ethernet, I can access my NAS at almost native speeds.

I'm not opposed to a $29 adapter though. The majority of the market only uses Wi-Fi, and is using it exclusively for internet (which is nowhere near saturating Wireless N in most households), or perhaps printing or occasional file sharing between machines. If that's all I did I'd be on Wi-Fi 100% of the time too. But when I'm working with terabytes of high resolution raw files and the like, I plug in to ethernet.

It's not like you have to carry a dongle around either, just leave it attached to the ethernet cable and plug it in to the machine.

Ethernet is now a niche market, even though some people are resisting it. For notebook computers, the vast majority are using Wi-Fi.

[Nodrog51]

Gosh, where do we start...
Involved in IT somewhere would be a bit of a gross understatement, but that's irrelevant. Angst doesn't really come into it because I've met so many different types of people in the world that I firmly believe in each to their own. Missleading comments in forum like this where real people are looking for honest advice Rubbish comment thou I try to correct

"8 months later" - [lol] welcome to the internet, you can freely say whatever you want... and it won't go away no matter how wrong you were.

"Hint" - [lol], I install these infrastructures. If you want to say ethernet is not used in college dorms or coffee shops then say that, I would agree with that completely... the business requirement is completely different and not network intensive at all. "Dual or Tri"... any idea how many antenna in business class APs?

The origin of the thread was based on someone wanting ethernet, when you jumped in saying it is a dying standard - that, in fact, IS complete bo**ocks. We're now up to multi GIG transfer rates... which for an 'engineer' is rather embarrassing not to know... wireless N with no contention?? maybe 130meg??

"A lot of people don't use ethernet"... fair enough... as a comment, but so is actually lots of people don't have a computer.

Wireless networking was a true innovation... err not really 1/ 'wireless' has been around for much longer 2/ radio/microwave comms links have been around much longer as well... I suggest the 'true innovation' was much older and this stuff was just the next progression.

"My argument was that those whom grip onto the old (i.e. ethernet) are simply slowing down the advancement of this technology"... oh dear me, what kind of an engineer are you again... actually both technologies are still advancing quite happily. To follow on from some of the car analogies in here, you'll be saying that we should halt cancer research so that more effort can be put into wireless development.

"IT is clearly not Apple's target demographic" - bingo, nail on head... oh, and getting back to the thing you remembered being called security... at least with iOS6 they have started to waken up but boy have they still a long way to go.

Anyway, back to each to their own, just don't go around trying to say stuff like ethernet dying standard, have a go with that other innovation called Google first.

All the best

[dyn]

Originally Posted by el-John-o

Ethernet is now a niche market, even though some people are resisting it. For notebook computers, the vast majority are using Wi-Fi.

If you are talking about home users only then yes. Ethernet has certain specifics that any wireless technology does not have which is the main reason why it is still being used and why it will be used in the future as well.

Wifi has an uncertain future because of overcrowding of the available frequencies. This is already the main reason for wifi problems. It's only since 2012 that there scientists have started doing research in this to see if they can make it more efficient than it is now (wifi is quickly growing towards having 80% of overhead and only 20% of actual data). Also, wifi is becoming faster and faster speeds also mean that is more sensitive. We already see it with USB3 and bluetooth. USB3 outputs more "radiation" affecting wireless technology such as bluetooth. The problems will only increase in time. If this is not addressed than it is wifi that will be a niche market as it was when it started out.

[el-John-o]

Originally Posted by dyn

If you are talking about home users only then yes. Ethernet has certain specifics that any wireless technology does not have which is the main reason why it is still being used and why it will be used in the future as well.

Wifi has an uncertain future because of overcrowding of the available frequencies. This is already the main reason for wifi problems. It's only since 2012 that there scientists have started doing research in this to see if they can make it more efficient than it is now (wifi is quickly growing towards having 80% of overhead and only 20% of actual data). Also, wifi is becoming faster and faster speeds also mean that is more sensitive. We already see it with USB3 and bluetooth. USB3 outputs more "radiation" affecting wireless technology such as bluetooth. The problems will only increase in time. If this is not addressed than it is wifi that will be a niche market as it was when it started out.

Oh I agree. But (perhaps incorrectly) I consider pro users and IT users a niche. A big niche, but a niche. The vast majority of computers in use today, are home users using Wi-Fi only who, if there is ANY ethernet in their home, it's between their router and modem.

I use ethernet myself. I can saturate 1gbps with my NAS, but can't come anywhere CLOSE to the 450mbps on Wireless N. And, even if I could, that's much too slow. But, even so, greater than 80% of my time my notebook computers are on Wi-Fi. That's because although I spend hours and hours in my office, plugged in to ethernet, accessing my NAS, I also spend quite a bit of time surfing the web somewhere else than home, watching a movie on netflix before bed, etc. etc.

Advertising the speeds is a big annoyance for me. USB3 isn't even close to 5gbps. Even the USB standard says that the speeds are actually only around 3.7Gbps but the CABLE, the CABLE, is capable of 5gbps. But they sure advertise 5Gbps don't they! Real-world testing for most machine is around 2-3 or maaaybe 4gbps. Yet I can SATURATE gigabit ethernet at it's full link speed with the right equipment. And of course Wi-Fi isn't even close. Perhaps half of it's advertised speed.